From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE68C138CD0 for ; Thu, 21 May 2015 20:46:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AF48AE08D9; Thu, 21 May 2015 20:45:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9795E088A for ; Thu, 21 May 2015 20:45:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ig0-f181.google.com (mail-ig0-f181.google.com [209.85.213.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: floppym) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D9408340F7E for ; Thu, 21 May 2015 20:45:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: by igbhj9 with SMTP id hj9so20758740igb.1 for ; Thu, 21 May 2015 13:45:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.43.34.205 with SMTP id st13mr5489601icb.4.1432241151702; Thu, 21 May 2015 13:45:51 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.64.124.229 with HTTP; Thu, 21 May 2015 13:45:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20150521214455.34017eb1@hal9000.localdomain> References: <20150521214455.34017eb1@hal9000.localdomain> From: Mike Gilbert Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 16:45:31 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] [~and64] Headsup for google-chrome users To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 06c61721-2813-4016-b060-608c2e11e3fb X-Archives-Hash: 2fc9aae3f8dc9fa78d07a3bbff18323c On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 3:44 PM, wrote: > walt wrote: > > [...] >> Then, after I figured out that CONFIG_USER_NS is a kernel config item, >> requiring reinstallation of my kernel, I wasted more time figuring out >> (for the n'th time) that you shouldn't just change a single kernel >> config item and do "make" because that shortcut can break important >> things. >> >> No, you should do "make clean" first, and then do "make" etc. > [...] > > I haven't done a "make clean" for years when I compiled a kernel and I > never had any problems. Then you have not made any critical config changes, or you have been very lucky.